If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

A handler with more than three dogs entered in a stake would mean more revenue for the club, it could be more hassle for the club and more competition for the other handlers, but it has nothing to do with the handler's amateur status. You are either working dogs for compensation or not, if not, how would the number of dogs you run alter that?

I also don't see it as a big problem that needs fixing, how many trials a year does one amateur enter more than three dogs in a stake? If it is a problem that needs to be solved, make a rule limiting the number of dogs anyone can enter in the amateur. Though I would be against such a rule, it at least doesn't try to redefine amateur in a way that has nothing to do with amateur-professional status.

LOL. I have never entered more than two in an Am but if I entered 3, 4 or even a dozen, the only thing anyone would say is "thanks for the donation"

I'm right there with ya on this! If EVER, I could have three healthy dogs who were READY to enter any stake of a FT at one time, I would call it a great day. If anyone even noticed, I think they would thank me too for the donation.

your intentions are good but who would submit their 1040 to scrutiny..

I have never understood the attempts to define amateur status as anything more than you are an amateur if you do not accept compensation for training retrievers for field trials, hunt tests, or hunting or you do not receive compensation for handling them in competition. Seems pretty forthright and simple which doesn't mean that some field trial committee could not decide otherwise but as long as that decision is left to field trial committee there can always be some incorrect interpretation of the rule. We have never considered peoiple who breed dogs, sell dogs, write books, make videos, or give seminars to be professional dog trainers. Professional trainers are people who train dogs for other people for money.

I agree. We have left out first rights of refusal, buying selling dog for a dollar, raising a puppy , pre basics, etc., etc, are you training dogs or handling dogs for money? I have been on club boards and field trial committees that have had to make this decision. It's the bottom line ,kinda like labeling someone an amateur pro such as a retired person training for?

A handler with more than three dogs entered in a stake would mean more revenue for the club, it could be more hassle for the club and more competition for the other handlers, but it has nothing to do with the handler's amateur status. You are either working dogs for compensation or not, if not, how would the number of dogs you run alter that?

I also don't see it as a big problem that needs fixing, how many trials a year does one amateur enter more than three dogs in a stake? If it is a problem that needs to be solved, make a rule limiting the number of dogs anyone can enter in the amateur. Though I would be against such a rule, it at least doesn't try to redefine amateur in a way that has nothing to do with amateur-professional status.

John

I received a PM from someone who pointed out that back east, that's anywhere east of New Mexico for us westerners, there are quite a number of amateurs who enter anywhere from four to nine dogs. I had no idea, we have the very rare handler with over three dogs out here. I still say it would be better to address the issue with a rule directly rather than trying to redefine Amateur.

First, there have always been people who contribute to the sport and those who do not. Changing the definition of Amateur is: a) not an appropriate way to address the problem; and b) not an effective manner of addressing the issue.

Second, to the extent that the concern is one of Field Trial efficiency, that is, amateur handlers with multiple dogs are making the judges wait, the rules aalready empower the Field Trial Committee to address those issues.

Third, to the extent that the concern is competitive inequity - are you going to limit the number of dogs per handler in the Open? As an All Age competitor, I am more concerned about running against a pro with 15 dogs in the Open than running against an amateur with 4 dogs in the Am.

In short, I don't think there is any benefit to changing the definition of an "Amateur."

I have nothing to add to this discussion except that I know Rex Gibson. As Tammy stated, he judges and runs hunt tests. He has been a working member of Brazosport RC as well as Greater Houston Golden RC for many years. Rex has a career as a corporate attorney. He has chaired events, shot flyers, marshaled, and done anything and everything that has needed to be done at the tests. I think he has recently begun running field trials. If he owns and maintains 4 or more dogs capable of doing the work, why shouldn't he be allowed to enter them all as an amateur? It seems that it would give a handler a better chance to possibly take home a ribbon.

I feel the real test as to whether a person is a pro is the acceptance of compensation for training or handling dogs, not how many dogs they own and handle.

We only run the occasional O/H Q for fun - we mainly run HT. I know this conversation is about FT AM status, and my view is from HT. But - I am most DEFINITELY an Amateur. But don't be surprised if I show up at a HT and have 6 dogs running in MH. They are all MY dogs that my husband and I own. Most of them are puppies that we have raised - we buy one from someone else every few years, but most of our dogs are from our litters. We both work full time jobs. We're not rich. We don't train every day. But we have some pretty nice dogs. This hobby is what my husband and I love to do together. It's our thing that we do together to have fun and relax and get away from the stress of our jobs. To say I'm not an AM based on the number of dogs I'm running is crazy. And don't even go there about people with multiple dogs don't work the stakes. We work our butts off at our club tests and are always willing to help out at other tests.

Regarding Rex Gibson - he is one of the nicest and hardest working guys you will find in our games. I consider it an honor to be running in a HT with him.

We only run the occasional O/H Q for fun - we mainly run HT. I know this conversation is about FT AM status, and my view is from HT. But - I am most DEFINITELY an Amateur. But don't be surprised if I show up at a HT and have 6 dogs running in MH. They are all MY dogs that my husband and I own. Most of them are puppies that we have raised - we buy one from someone else every few years, but most of our dogs are from our litters. We both work full time jobs. We're not rich. We don't train every day. But we have some pretty nice dogs. This hobby is what my husband and I love to do together. It's our thing that we do together to have fun and relax and get away from the stress of our jobs. To say I'm not an AM based on the number of dogs I'm running is crazy. And don't even go there about people with multiple dogs don't work the stakes. We work our butts off at our club tests and are always willing to help out at other tests.

Regarding Rex Gibson - he is one of the nicest and hardest working guys you will find in our games. I consider it an honor to be running in a HT with him.

I am pretty uninformed about hunt tests, is there an Amateur only stake at hunt tests, since hunt tests are not competitive does anyone care?...just wondering since I am hunt test ignorant.